Jump to content

Pixii : A new M mount rangefinder


IkarusJohn
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

A rangefinder, as an opto-mechanical way of focusing a lens, is just a means to an end, not an attraction in itself. The interesting question is why they chose a RF design over AF:

As to the first, that is a "speak for oneself" question. I bought into Leica mostly for the "snap two images together to focus manually" technology - once the SLR folks mostly quit providing split-image focus screens. That was the main attraction; I put up with everything else about Leica to get it. ;)

As to the second, it appears PIXII is not making any lenses themselves, just the camera. Using the M-mount, for which there exist approximately zero lenses with any AF capability anyway.

(Technically, I suppose, they could have installed a moving lens mount or sensor to auto-focus manual lenses, a la Contax AX. But that gets pretty complex in itself, and likely adds bulk (the AX was quite pudgy for a film SLR, to allow room for the internal focusing movement - and still had limited close-up ability. https://emulsive.org/reviews/camera-reviews/contax-camera-reviews/reviewing-the-contax-ax-autofocusing-manual-focus-lenses )

I see the PIXII as sort of an updated Epson R-D1. It is an as-simple-as-possible rangefinder-digital body for existing M lenses. The APS-C format crops off the corners where RF lenses have trouble on digital, bypassing all those headaches (the Epson used a stock Sony sensor and provided no corrections - didn't know nor care which focal length was mounted). The Epson could hide the rear screen - the PIXII moves it to your phone.

Cosmetically, it reminds me of the Leicasonic C1/C2 film cameras from the 90s - black "racoon-mask" around the finder, and embedded top plate; top LCD data display. Just squared off at the corners, like the Hexar RF already mentioned.

https://www.keh.com/shop/leica-c1-chrome-zoom-678392.html

It's not for me - I like my 21mm pictures uncropped, and I don't even own a smartphone. But, again like the Epson, it seems like an interesting leveraging of technology, for those who want a digital RF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, adan said:

As to the first, that is a "speak for oneself" question. I bought into Leica mostly for the "snap two images together to focus manually" technology - once the SLR folks mostly quit providing split-image focus screens. That was the main attraction; I put up with everything else about Leica to get it. ;)

As to the second, it appears PIXII is not making any lenses themselves, just the camera. Using the M-mount, for which there exist approximately zero lenses with any AF capability anyway.

(Technically, I suppose, they could have installed a moving lens mount or sensor to auto-focus manual lenses, a la Contax AX. But that gets pretty complex in itself, and likely adds bulk (the AX was quite pudgy for a film SLR, to allow room for the internal focusing movement - and still had limited close-up ability. https://emulsive.org/reviews/camera-reviews/contax-camera-reviews/reviewing-the-contax-ax-autofocusing-manual-focus-lenses )

I see the PIXII as sort of an updated Epson R-D1. It is an as-simple-as-possible rangefinder-digital body for existing M lenses. The APS-C format crops off the corners where RF lenses have trouble on digital, bypassing all those headaches (the Epson used a stock Sony sensor and provided no corrections - didn't know nor care which focal length was mounted). The Epson could hide the rear screen - the PIXII moves it to your phone.

Cosmetically, it reminds me of the Leicasonic C1/C2 film cameras from the 90s - black "racoon-mask" around the finder, and embedded top plate; top LCD data display. Just squared off at the corners, like the Hexar RF already mentioned.

https://www.keh.com/shop/leica-c1-chrome-zoom-678392.html

It's not for me - I like my 21mm pictures uncropped, and I don't even own a smartphone. But, again like the Epson, it seems like an interesting leveraging of technology, for those who want a digital RF.

I'll count you as another vote for an M8. 🤠

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ecar said:

It would be great to attract a younger crowd to RF photography, but at this price level and with those specs, I predict they will be out of business sooner rather than later. I hope I'm wrong, though...

The marketing is slanted to taking images to put on your phone. Which begs the question: why not just use the phone and leave the camera at home?

Link to post
Share on other sites

do they have any image samples to show at all? I can't find them on the website. That's odd if the thing actually exists. One thing: I think it looks quite nice. Another thing: it costs too much.

 

What I want to see is a full frame mechanical RF competitor to leica. Or not so much a competitor as a cheaper alternative. I would be very interested in such a camera- with no LCD- smartphone connected. I would happily have an anolog control to manually change RF lines- and a form factor like the Hexar RF. I've been wanting that for years and it just never happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Mirrorless EVF is not the only alternative to a camera with a rangefinder. You can have an optical viewfinder and no EVF, and still have autofocus (plenty of film cameras were designed that way). Rangefinder is just the focus mechanism, not the viewing mechanism.

Sure - I have a Fuji camera which does that. There are also SLRs, TLRs, view cameras, and more. But Einst_stein and I were talking about cameras for mounting M lenses on, and what one's preferences might be, and there I think there are only the two alternatives mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • jaapv changed the title to A new rangefinder camera with the M mount {merged}

Well, I guess I have to accept that there are people out there who are attracted to rangefinder focusing in itself😉! I'm just in into cameras as a means to take photographs, and the RF mechanism is just part of that means. (FTAOD I was a happy M user for many years - till last year - but never considered the RF mechanism a contributory part of that happiness).

Certainly, if you start with a M lens, then that drives you towards a RF. I would be curious to hear which design choices led to the Pixii: was it the choice of M-mount drove everything else? Or the objective for a low-power connected camera meant that AF was not feasible?

I find this an interesting camera, and easier to consider on its own merits, rather than as a potential replacement for a Leica M or CL (either CL). The Sigma fp (which I bought) was the same. In this case I can't see what I would use it for, but that doesn't mean that someone else can't see a value in what this can do that an M or CL can't: easily shoot high quality images to the internet. The proposed Zeiss ZX1 had a similar concept. I suspect it may suffer from a problem outside its control that I found with the Fotos app: even allowing for the connection issues and slow download, uploading a high quality image from a phone to the internet is slow. If the Pixii is 10-12Mp, then that might mitigate the problem a bit.

Edited by LocalHero1953
Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Well, I guess I have to accept that there are people out there who are attracted to rangefinder focusing in itself😉! I'm just in into cameras as a means to take photographs, and the RF mechanism is just part of that means. (FTAOD I was a happy M user for many years - till last year - but never considered the RF mechanism a contributory part of that happiness).

Certainly, if you start with a M lens, then that drives you towards a RF. I would be curious to hear which design choices led to the Pixii: was it the choice of M-mount drove everything else? Or the objective for a low-power connected camera meant that AF was not feasible?

I find this an interesting camera, and easier to consider on its own merits, rather than as a potential replacement for a Leica M or CL (either CL). The Sigma fp (which I bought) was the same. In this case I can't see what I would use it for, but that doesn't mean that someone else can't see a value in what this can do that an M or CL can't: easily shoot high quality images to the internet. The proposed Zeiss ZX1 had a similar concept. I suspect it may suffer from a problem outside its control that I found with the Fotos app: even allowing for the connection issues and slow download, uploading a high quality image from a phone to the internet is slow. If the Pixii is 10-12Mp, then that might mitigate the problem a bit.

The thing about the M mount is that the patent has expired (except the six-bit coding) and that there is a multitude of lenses to choose from. I don't see any other viable choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was excited to see a Leica M mount camera by a third party. Then I saw the price tag. As much as I would love to support the company, that's really a lot of money for an aps-c camera.  Used 240s in great condition are under $3k these days, and it is very hard to justify buying PIXII (and the old memory dealing with M8 crop factor comes back).  Hope the company figure out a way to make it attractive to a wider audience.

 It's great that the company sold many copies.  Would love to hear the decision making process of actual buyers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dkmoore said:

I would like to poll the following question: 

If you were offered a like new condition M8 or Pixi dust for free, which would you choose? 

I'm going M8 all day. 

For free? PIXII then. No shutter noise and high isos would make the difference for me... But i would keep my M8.2 :D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would wait for reports on RF accuracy. The base appears rather short and it is only 0.67x An APS sensor is more difficult to focus by RF than a FF  one - reason the M8 was not meant for 135 mm, Stefan Daniel once explained to me. Hard to imagine that they can beat an optical company with over 70 years of experience and development.

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor einer Stunde schrieb pop:

Not a rumor. It's the only shutter it has, according to the spec sheet.

A global shutter is different from a simple electronic shutter. Not to speak of a mechanical copal shutter.

I understand, that there is shooting out of every gun barrel on this new duck in the pond.

Edited by jankap
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...